Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: beavus
Beavus, you're obviously a very smart guy, and I appreciate all of the thought and time you put into your arguments. To dissect them piecemeal is simply too much effort, and it's akin to talking to a wall. I cut my last post short halfway through because I had work to do. Besides, neither of us will convince the other that he is wrong.

I apologize for making the assumption that you believe in the "big bang," as most evolutionists are subscribers to that theory by default. Whether the universe was the result of a massive explosion is beside the point I was trying to make. If you subscribe to evolution theory, then you must believe a single-celled organism was the "stem cell" for the existence of every living thing. A single-celled organism was either A: created by a supernatural intelligent being, or B: a product of random peptides attracting to each other to form a chromosome.

My biggest problem with evolution has nothing to do with the biological and chemical mechanics of evolutionary process, but with the probabilities that the universe, our habitat, and our existence came into being through random chance and natural selection.

I was a pre-Med biology major, and I don't have any difficulty grasping the mechanics of reproduction, adaptation, and evolutionary theory, but the evidence just isn't compelling for me, so I'll continue to believe what I believe, and you will continue to believe what you believe.

The cold, hard truth is that there are certain things that neither of us can explain. The scientific evidence doesn't hold water for me, and the gospels don't carry any weight with you. I was an atheist, an agnostic, and finally I took the time to really study biblical scripture, which I believe is the most plausible explanation for our existence. You have every right to consider this belief nothing more than "poofism." My proof is hardly more compelling than your proof. That's why they call it faith.

The complexities of life, the struggle between good and evil, the temptation of sin, and the healing power of repentance and faith are what steered me away from belief in the speculative science of evolution. Finding God was a blessing. It has changed my life for the better. Say what you will about Christianity or religion in general. I've heard it all and I'm not offended by people who don't understand what it's like to have a relationship with God.

May I ask what you do for a living? I'll venture a guess that you're in a profession that requires a great deal of procedural and/or statistical analysis. Aside from the pot-shots we took at each other, I really enjoy your writing style, and you don't mince words. Although you don't have my agreement, you have earned my respect through your writing ability. I appreciate the debate. Perhaps we can discuss a topic where we share some common ground in the future?

All the best, HighImpact

313 posted on 12/29/2004 4:17:29 PM PST by highimpact (The only way to defeat terrorism is to annihilate the terrorists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies ]


To: highimpact
I apologize for making the assumption that you believe in the "big bang," as most evolutionists are subscribers to that theory by default. Whether the universe was the result of a massive explosion is beside the point I was trying to make.

That's right. Inflationary cosmology has nothing to do with evolutionary biology. It was strange for you to just toss that in out of nowhere.

If you subscribe to evolution theory, then you must believe a single-celled organism was the "stem cell" for the existence of every living thing.

"Must" isn't true. Evolution theory describes facts observed even prospectively in laboratories. However, it is also frequently used to explain fossil evidence, as well as speculations about how all life may have developed from a single cell lifeform.

We know there was a time before life on earth. We know there was a time after single cell life and before multicellular organisms. We also know that the universe operates smoothly above quantum scales. Evolutionary biology currently gives us the best means of speculating about how these smooth transitions occured.

A single-celled organism was either A: created by a supernatural intelligent being, or B: a product of random peptides attracting to each other to form a chromosome.

Or C: a product of deterministic nonintelligent forces, or D: created by a natural intelligent being, or E: created by a supernatural unintelligent being, or F: created by a natural unintelligent being, or G: created elsewhere and deposited by a meteor, or H: created by several intelligent beings, or I: created by a mixture of intelligent and unintelligent beings, or J: randomly formed in the presence of intelligent beings. I could come up with many more possibilities. You are not providing a logical either-or. "Nonrandom" does not equal "a supernatural intelligent".

My biggest problem with evolution has nothing to do with the biological and chemical mechanics of evolutionary process, but with the probabilities that the universe, our habitat, and our existence came into being through random chance and natural selection.

Again, what does natural selection have to do with the universe coming into being? Don't you know that there is a difference between cosmology and evolutionary biology?

Also, you keep alluding to some random model for "our existence". What model would that be? Why do you think probability theory is the only posited alternative to "supernatural intelligent" creation for explaining life on earth?

I don't have any difficulty grasping the mechanics of reproduction, adaptation, and evolutionary theory

Then why do you keep writing about "leaps" and "points" of evolution? Why do you insist that an individual organism must demonstrate evolutionary change? No reputable biology text teaches such things. That is, if you understand evolutionary theory, then why do you write as if you do not?

the evidence just isn't compelling for me

That's fine. Everyone has his own standard of persuasiveness. If it doesn't make sense to you, then by all means, do not claim that it does. I would never advocate such a thing. Beliefs are what you discover in yourself, not what you directly choose.

However, if you are not just proclaiming utter ignorance on the topic of life on earth, I would ask you what alternative theory you find persuasive, and if you are applying the same skeptical standards to it.

the gospels don't carry any weight with you

Which gospels are you referring to that contradict evolutionary biology? Why would you assume that they carry no weight with me? Why would you think that they have anything at all to do with evolution?

biblical scripture, which I believe is the most plausible explanation for our existence

I didn't find an explanation for our existence in biblical scripture. There was a short passage in Genesis, but it doesn't even attempt to be such an explanation. All I know of is a modern cult of creationists who have created their own extrabiblical doctrine of creation which contradicts observed facts. I give little heed to such self-proclaimed prophets, especially when they say things that are known to be false.

The complexities of life, the struggle between good and evil, the temptation of sin, and the healing power of repentance and faith are what steered me away from belief in the speculative science of evolution.

But NONE of those things has ANYTHING to do with the science of evolution. It's like saying that life's problems steered you away from plate tectonics. It just doesn't make sense.

Say what you will about Christianity or religion in general.

I've said nothing about them except that they have nothing to do with evolutionary biology; and that their merits have nothing to do with the false claims of the creationist cult.

It is clear that you have bought into a false link between evolutionary biology and Christianity. Someone has convinced you of the false dichotomy that either God exists or evolution is true, but not both.

Perhaps we can discuss a topic where we share some common ground in the future?

Your words are gracious, and I make no claims to know anything about you--only your words on this thread. I value this as a forum for *ideas*, freely expressed and freely criticized without regard to irrelevancies regarding the messengers. I didn't mean to touch on my background in an effort to stifle your criticism, but only to avoid what I thought would turn into another unnecessary massive posting of textbook material.

314 posted on 12/29/2004 5:48:30 PM PST by beavus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 313 | View Replies ]

To: highimpact

"I was a pre-Med biology major, and I don't have any difficulty grasping the mechanics of reproduction, adaptation, and evolutionary theory, but the evidence just isn't compelling for me, so I'll continue to believe what I believe, and you will continue to believe what you believe.

The cold, hard truth is that there are certain things that neither of us can explain. The scientific evidence doesn't hold water for me, and the gospels don't carry any weight with you. I was an atheist, an agnostic, and finally I took the time to really study biblical scripture, which I believe is the most plausible explanation for our existence."

Here is some GOOD NEWS! You can believe that God is responsible for our existence and evolution is a fact.

The Theory of Evolution does not contain the act of creation. It simply deals with the life we see and see in the fossil record. If someone told you otherwise, they were misrepresenting the facts of biology.


317 posted on 01/10/2005 8:28:50 AM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 313 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson